Michael Tiernan wrote:
Okay, I have to ask this.... I feel stupid but I've not seen the answer yet.If you using a config from another release. I prefer "make oldconfig" you will only be asked about new options. If you want a graphical "make xconfig" or if you aren't running X "make menuconfig".
(No doubt as soon as I send this I'll figure it out.)
If I take the kernel sources (/usr/src/linux*) and do a "make mrproper" to clean them up/out, I end up with a "blank slate". This works fine.
Now, if I copy a config from the configs directory to be ".config" (or if I used a config file from another build) what's the *next* step to be done?
You have to do a make config/oldconfig/menuconfig/xconfig after you do a "make mrproper". Otherwise your kernel sources aren't configured to produce a kernel for your cpu type. (or any type )Using 'make dep' fails. Doing a 'make config' doesn't do as I'd expect.
Also, doing a 'make oldconfig' doesn't seem to take use the '.config' file as gospel and makes changes to it.It tends to reorder things and screws with spacing, but it should result in the same configuration. (Unless there are new options.) Are you sure that it's doing what you claim? (This would be a bug if true.)
So what's the deal, does a '.config' file represent ALL the needed switches/options to create a new kernel? I guess some of what I'm looking for here is reproducability.Yes for the most part. The makefile controls such things as what version the kernel claims it is, and the compiler you use can effect things.
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
